"the Octatrack is amazing - potentially. Also, it is potentially going to require years to become acquainted with."

surely this is hyperbole? having watched the Cuckoo Digitakt vs. Octatrack workflow video, I was not particularly under the impression that the learning gap is days vs years. If you want to do the sorts of things the Digitakt does, it seems like you can do them after a read-through of the Octatrack manual, watching a few tutorial videos, etc. Not dive down into years of obsession. That's for the more esoteric stuff (of which, yes, there are tons.) Like, even my Nord Modular was giving me plenty of usable results within weeks, so...

"the Octatrack is amazing - potentially. Also, it is potentially going to require years to become acquainted with."

surely this is hyperbole? having watched the Cuckoo Digitakt vs. Octatrack workflow video, I was not particularly under the impression that the learning gap is days vs years.

I don't know. As smart as I'd like to think I am, some things take a long time to wrap my pretty little head around. Your mileage my vary, but Cuckoo's videos help shave off months if not years of knowledge absorption.

I doubt it will get stereo sampling, but as for stereo processing... the dream lives on. Otherwise, the labelling is a little bit goofy, so for the sake of clarity why not simply label it Input 1 and Input 2?

I'm a relative newbie to all Elektron gear. I bought an Octatrack last year and have been going through the paces patiently. I also bought a Digitakt, initially with a view to seeing if I should sell the OT.

In the end, the DT has helped me appreciate the OT more. They are both great machines, but the DT is more immediate. Now when I go back to the OT, I find myself replicating things I did on the DT that I perhaps wouldn't have thought of doing before on the OT.

So the machines are very complementary for me. Each to their own needs, and so on. Having experienced both boxes, and having the luxury to afford to keep both, I think it's too reductive to pose questions like OT v. DT. They're different, but both could easily find their way into the same setup, even in more experienced hands than my own.

I also just really like Kits (Parts), and DT's implementation isn't my favorite in that department.

Without DT, I'd mostly be losing out on immediacy, but with practice I can overcome that.And trig conditions, but I have two other sequencers with that feature, and LFO designer should help bring the random.

CTRL ALL is something that scene can easily fake with a bit of Scenes setup, and I'm not opposed to taking the time. In fact with MD, I went to great lengths to make CTRL ALL more customizable by p-locking steps on sounds I didn't want affected by that action. So in this regard, Scenes are no more work for me.

The real question is what kind of Trinity Name does an AR MK1 + AK + OT MK2 get bestowed.

Without DT, I'd mostly be losing out on immediacy, but with practice I can overcome that.And trig conditions, but I have two other sequencers with that feature, and LFO designer should help bring the random.

CTRL ALL is something that scene can easily fake with a bit of Scenes setup, and I'm not opposed to taking the time. In fact with MD, I went to great lengths to make CTRL ALL more customizable by p-locking steps on sounds I didn't want affected by that action. So in this regard, Scenes are no more work for me.

Totally. If I was operating with your gear, I would come to the same conclusion. It was Cuckoo's comparison study that really got me considering the Octarack. Either one would be great. But with my setup, budget, and the alleged slight edge for polyphonic MIDI sequencing, I went the other way.

The real question is what kind of Trinity Name does an AR MK1 + AK + OT MK2 get bestowed.

the Abstractly Responsive Trinity

i love the sound of the Digitakt

OT sound is fabulous also, and actually has a variety of sound design options to achieve the warmth clarity and presence of the Digitakt .. i think 24 bit mode is going to be almost essential to use on the OT to achieve the same quality.